"If you adopt it I'd be very pleased, if you don't that's your prerogative." There just aren't enough words to express how much I love that. Can everyone please start being that awesome?!
I enjoyed your comments about "QSL!" I was first licensed in 1970, but only was active for a few years. I came back this year. When I heard QSL, QSL? on SSB, I had no idea what those guys were trying to say! Did they want a card? Ha! 73, Duane WA7PGE (again)
Culture always evolves, but it's still valuable to know the lineage. I don't know that you're that much older than me, but you're much older in the hobby than I am -- I just picked it up this year! I'd also wondered about the current use of QSL (because while I'm a new ham, I used to be an SWL). It seems to be very common on SSB to use "QSL?" instead of "Copy?" or just "Over", and having heard it used that way, and, "QSL!" instead of "Roger!" to confirm. I'll admit I've pretty much just followed the crowd, without really thinking about it much. I'm only just starting to learn code (with LICW :-D ), so I don't have much experience yet with hearing it used that way with code, as well. I agree with you that, in CW, where brevity matters, "QSL?" as a question feels redundant, and "QSL" as an answer longer than "R". At any rate, I definitely appreciate the perspective! Thank you!
Thanks, useful rundown of what we hear these days. I got my first license in 1980 and has been off since about 1990. Coming back now and wondering a bit about some of the things you mention here if there is a good reason it has changed. Nice to get that cleared up!
I joined LICW 2 weeks ago and just started INT 1&2. I call CQ here in the UK at 12-14wpm and many times get replies at higher speed. I asked on a forum why would people do that as I was taught to reply at the same speed. I was told, by operators that do it, they assume you are sending slow for slower operators so send faster just in case you work faster. They then said my 30 year old call sign was the reason. What happened to replying at the same speed? Also 95% over here don't QRS when asked. Totally agree with QSL, I hear QSL in CW suggests we will exchange paper cards. A very worth while video with useful information as always. Thank you.
Good video. I agree completely on the use of "QSL" and "pse cpi". In reading the IARU Procedural Manual, it states AR as being used at the end of a CQ call, e.g., CQ DE AB1CDE AR. The author claims K is incorrect because K means "over to you", but on a CQ call there is nobody in the contact to turn it over to (yet). I like AR because sometimes K sounds like the end of the caller's call sign....a spacing problem. Anyway, I thank the LICW Club for furthering my enjoyment of the hobby. 73 de KJ4MZ #2000.
Absoluetly agree about the cq call. cq x3 c/s x2 pause and if no response send 2x2 until acknowledged. IMO a cq longer than the 3x2 format is wasting every ops time, the initiator as well as the op waiting to respond. Again, IMO the initial 3x2 and subsiquent 2x2 comes across as efficient, considerate and profesional.
What's wrong with using QSL to confirm reception of an SKCC number in a cw QSO?, or a grid square in a satellite exchange? Tilting at windmills a bit Howard? :) Tom, W9TOX
Much of the online training stuff, including CW training materials, train that QSL means confirm. The popular Kurt Z Morse Ninja cw practice videos translate QSL as confirm, same as CFM. Now I send R (Roger) because it's much easier to key.... But there are hams that learned phone first and saying QSL, asking if the other party can confirm what was sent, v is the most common usage and though much if the nomenclature of phone is drawn from CW, for newer hams I think, who learn CW secondarily, phone habits bleed into CW. Personally, QSLs meaning is context-driven... Please send QSL is asking for something... QSL by a certain instruction set is instructions.... The ending information with QSL? Is asking for confirmation... I really don't see the problem in using it that way beyond it's harder to send unless efficient but it's meaning is contextually obvious, at least on phone. CW abbreviations and shorthand is very much like the way teenagers text today, which sometimes I have to have my 15-year-old daughter translate those for me! So wraps this doesn't all apply to CW quite as clearly... But I've yet to encounter anyone during a CW QSO use QSL for anything other than a QSO confirmation instruction.
As a new CW operator, these kind of tips are very valuable and love hearing the historical context. Thanks Howard!
"If you adopt it I'd be very pleased, if you don't that's your prerogative." There just aren't enough words to express how much I love that. Can everyone please start being that awesome?!
I enjoyed your comments about "QSL!" I was first licensed in 1970, but only was active for a few years. I came back this year. When I heard QSL, QSL? on SSB, I had no idea what those guys were trying to say! Did they want a card? Ha! 73, Duane WA7PGE (again)
Good stuff Howard! I hope you will continue to share your "CW Thoughts" with us! 73, Patrick KF4LMZ
Thanks for the sanity check,Howard! Nice video !
de N2WBJ
Right, I do the same, 20 times CQ, I turn the dial! Good comments Howard,thanks
F5IJO
Thanks for clearing these things up Howard! As an old CW operator I know exactly what you are talking about.
Thanks for sharing, Howard! It’s great to hear from someone with so much experience. My only sin is sometimes sending QSL. I’ll try to use R instead.
Culture always evolves, but it's still valuable to know the lineage. I don't know that you're that much older than me, but you're much older in the hobby than I am -- I just picked it up this year!
I'd also wondered about the current use of QSL (because while I'm a new ham, I used to be an SWL). It seems to be very common on SSB to use "QSL?" instead of "Copy?" or just "Over", and having heard it used that way, and, "QSL!" instead of "Roger!" to confirm. I'll admit I've pretty much just followed the crowd, without really thinking about it much. I'm only just starting to learn code (with LICW :-D ), so I don't have much experience yet with hearing it used that way with code, as well. I agree with you that, in CW, where brevity matters, "QSL?" as a question feels redundant, and "QSL" as an answer longer than "R".
At any rate, I definitely appreciate the perspective! Thank you!
Here's hoping you will be around for a long time, Howard! Thx fer cw gems es fb lessons!
Thanks, useful rundown of what we hear these days. I got my first license in 1980 and has been off since about 1990. Coming back now and wondering a bit about some of the things you mention here if there is a good reason it has changed. Nice to get that cleared up!
I joined LICW 2 weeks ago and just started INT 1&2. I call CQ here in the UK at 12-14wpm and many times get replies at higher speed. I asked on a forum why would people do that as I was taught to reply at the same speed. I was told, by operators that do it, they assume you are sending slow for slower operators so send faster just in case you work faster. They then said my 30 year old call sign was the reason. What happened to replying at the same speed? Also 95% over here don't QRS when asked. Totally agree with QSL, I hear QSL in CW suggests we will exchange paper cards. A very worth while video with useful information as always. Thank you.
Most certainly appreciate you sharing your experience. I will take it for action. Sonny WC8L
Good video. I agree completely on the use of "QSL" and "pse cpi". In reading the IARU Procedural Manual, it states AR as being used at the end of a CQ call, e.g., CQ DE AB1CDE AR. The author claims K is incorrect because K means "over to you", but on a CQ call there is nobody in the contact to turn it over to (yet). I like AR because sometimes K sounds like the end of the caller's call sign....a spacing problem. Anyway, I thank the LICW Club for furthering my enjoyment of the hobby. 73 de KJ4MZ #2000.
Muy interesante amigo 👏🏻
73
Finally, I remember to actually get online in time for the live stream!!!
or is it live? anyway, still glad I didn't miss it!
Agree!
Absoluetly agree about the cq call. cq x3 c/s x2 pause and if no response send 2x2 until acknowledged. IMO a cq longer than the 3x2 format is wasting every ops time, the initiator as well as the op waiting to respond. Again, IMO the initial 3x2 and subsiquent 2x2 comes across as efficient, considerate and profesional.
What's wrong with using QSL to confirm reception of an SKCC number in a cw QSO?, or a grid square in a satellite exchange? Tilting at windmills a bit Howard? :) Tom, W9TOX
Much of the online training stuff, including CW training materials, train that QSL means confirm. The popular Kurt Z Morse Ninja cw practice videos translate QSL as confirm, same as CFM.
Now I send R (Roger) because it's much easier to key.... But there are hams that learned phone first and saying QSL, asking if the other party can confirm what was sent, v is the most common usage and though much if the nomenclature of phone is drawn from CW, for newer hams I think, who learn CW secondarily, phone habits bleed into CW.
Personally, QSLs meaning is context-driven... Please send QSL is asking for something... QSL by a certain instruction set is instructions.... The ending information with QSL? Is asking for confirmation...
I really don't see the problem in using it that way beyond it's harder to send unless efficient but it's meaning is contextually obvious, at least on phone.
CW abbreviations and shorthand is very much like the way teenagers text today, which sometimes I have to have my 15-year-old daughter translate those for me! So wraps this doesn't all apply to CW quite as clearly... But I've yet to encounter anyone during a CW QSO use QSL for anything other than a QSO confirmation instruction.